【正答率结算中，本次正答率为70%，积分 200】
岑越崎大喜过望，这是他第一次正答率达到70%，只要保持这个正答率他就可以顺利通过六级考试了。
他合上试卷，指尖因为兴奋微微发颤，打开商城，他意外发现商城竟然升级了。
多了一行可兑换道具。
记忆增强，永久增幅 1，价格：200积分
岑越崎想了想，决定尽早兑换。
记忆力这东西似乎越早提升越吃香，攒着又不能升值。
眼前一闪，系统界面清零，岑越崎只觉脑海中一片澄明，他拿出试题决定检测下效果。
Technology is never a neutral （中立）tool for achieving human ends.
Technological innovations reshape people as they use these innovations to control their environment. Artificial intelligence, for example, is altering humanity.
While the term AI conjures up anxieties about killer robots or catastrophic（灾难级别的） levels of unemployment, there are other, deeper implications（暗示）.
As AI increasingly shapes the human experience, how does this change what it means to be human?
Central to the problem is a person''s capacity to make choices, particularly judgments that have moral implications.
Aristotle（亚里士多德） argued that the capacity for making practical judgments depends on regularly making them - on habit and practice.
We see the emergence （出现）of machines as substitute （替代）judges in a variety of everyday contexts as a potential threat to people learning how to effectively exercise judgment themselves.
In the workplace, managers routinely make decisions about who to hire or fire and which loan to approve, to name a few.
These are areas where algorithmic（算法） prescription （指示）is replacing human judgment, and so people who might have had the chance to develop practical judgment in these areas no longer will.
Rmendation engines, which are increasingly prevalent （流行的）intermediaries （中介机构）in people''s consumption of culture, may serve to constrain choice and minimize luck.
By presenting consumers with algorithmically selected choices of what to watch, read, stream and visit next,panies are replacing human taste with machine taste.
In one sense, this is helpful.
After all, machines can survey a wider range of choices than any individual is likely to have the time or energy to do on their own.
At the same time, though, this selection is optimizing （优化）for what people are likely to prefer based on what they''ve preferred in the past.
We think there is some risk that people''s options will be constrained（强迫） by their past in a new and unanticipated way. As machine learning algorithms improve and as they train on more extensive data sets, larger parts of everyday life are likely to be utterly （完全的）predictable.（可预测的）
The predictions are going to get better and better, and they will ultimately makemon experiences more efficient and pleasant.
Algorithms could soon -if they don''t already have a better idea about which show you''d like to watch next and which job candidate you should hire than you do.
One day, humans may even find a way for machines to make these decisions without some of the biases that humans typically display.
But to the extent that unpredictability is part of how people understand themselves and part of what people like about themselves, humanity is in the process of losing something significant.
As they be more and more predictable, the creatures inhabiting the increasingly AI-mediated world will be less and less like us.
1.What do we learn about the deeper implications of AI?
A) It is causing catastrophic levels of unemployment.
B)It is doing physical harm to human operators.
C)It is altering moral （道德）judgments.
D) It is reshaping humanity.
2.What is the consequence of algorithmic prescription replacing human judgment?
A) People lose the chance to cultivate the ability to make practical judgments.
B) People are prevented from participating in making major decisions in the workplace.
C) Managers no longer have the chance to decide which loan to approve.
D) Managers do not need to take the trouble to determine who to hire or fire.
3.What may result from increasing application of rmendation engines in our consumption of culture?
A) Consumers will have much limited choice.
B)Consumers will actually enjoy better luck.
C) It will be easier to decide on what to enjoy.
D) Humans will develop tastes similar to machines''.
4.What is likely to happen to larger parts of our daily life as machine learning algorithms improve? A) They will turn out to be more pleasant.
B)They will repeat our past experience.
C)They can bepletely anticipated.
D) They may be better and better.
5.Why does the author say the creatures living in the more and more AI-mediated world will be increasingly unlike us?
A) They will have lost the most significant human element of being intelligent.
B)They will no longer possess the human characteristic of being unpredictable.
C) They will not be able to understand themselves as we can do today.
D) They will be deprived of what their predecessors were proud of about themselves.
Key: D-A-A-C-B
How on earth（究竟） did wee to this?
We protect our children obsessively（过分的） from every harm; we scrutinize（仔细检查） every carer, teacher or doctor with whom theye into contact.
Yet despite all this, one group, which in no way has their best interests at heart, has almost unconstrained（不受约束的） access. We seem to take it for granted that advertisers and marketers are allowed to condition even the youngest childre-.
Before children have even developed a proper sense of their own identity, or learned to handle money, they''re encouraged to associate status and self-worth with stuff, and to look to external things such as fame and wealth for validation.（确认）
We''re turning out little consumers rather than young citizens who will value themselves for what they contribute to the society in which they live.
We''ve reached this point so gradually that many of us have never questioned it.
It''s crept up on us in the 60 years since advertisers started to target the young and found that they could recruit them to amercial assault on their parents.
We''vee to know it as "pester （纠缠）power" or the ability of children to pressure parents to make certain purchases. Many psychologists, child development experts and educators point to research suggesting that this emerging cradle-to-grave （从摇篮到坟墓）consumerism is contributing to growing rates of low self-esteem, depression and other forms of mental illness.
Not all psychologists agree.
There''re plenty working hand in glove with a ?12bn-a-year industry that has turned the manipulation（操纵） of □□ emotions and desires into an art form - often literally.
It''s also one that''s forever developing new ways to persuade our children to desire material possessions, and because of advertisements'' viral effect they only need to infect a few to reach the many.
Advertising and marketing can serve a useful purpose for children.
Marketing may help socialize children as consumers, inform them about products, and help them carve out unique identities as they reach adulthood.
Then, should we ban all advertising aimed at young children?
I say yes.
Of course there''ll be plenty of objections （反对）to an outright （全部的）ban on advertising to the under-11s.
There''ll be those who argue that would be a breach of freedom of speech and infringe （侵犯）the rights of corporations（公司） to brainwash （洗脑）little children into demanding their products.
Most parents hate what advertising does to their children, but we do have the power to end it and let our children grow up free from many of the pressures of consumerism until they''re old enough to make their own decisions. And though advertising is only part of an all-pervasive（无孔不入的） marketing culture we need to make a start somewhere. Let''s ban all advertising targeting children of primary school age and younger now.
1.Which group of people does the author say has almost unrestricted access to children?
A) Advertisers.
B) Carers.
C) Teachers.
D) Doctors.
2.What kind of people should we enable children to be according to the author?
A)Those who look to fame and wealth for external and ultimate validation
B)Those who value themselves because of their contribution to society.
C)Those who associate self-worth with the ability to handle money.
D) Those who have developed a proper sense of their own identity.
3.Many child development experts and educators call attention to research that suggests:
A) life-long consumerism is causing more and more cases of psychological problems.
B) increasingmercialization of education is eroding many children''s self-esteem.
C) the growing desire for wealth is contributing to a rising rate of depression.
D) the craving for purchasing material things is nurtured throughout one''s life.
4.What does the author imply about the impact of advertising?
A)It is actually infectious to many rather than a few.
B)It is rooted in our desire for material possessions.
C)It isparable to that of virus.
D) It is literally limited to children.
5.What is the opponents'' argument against aplete ban on advertising to young children?
A) It would deprive（剥夺） them of the chance to learn about products.
B)It would render（致使） them unable to carve out unique identities.
C)It would breach （违背）their freedom as would-be consumers.
D) It would violate the rights endowed （赋予）upon advertisers.
Key: A-B-A-A-D
If you''re someone who has turned to snacking （吃零食）on junk food more in the pandemic, you''re not alone.
Investigative reporter Michael Moss says processed food is engineered （设计）to hook（吸引） you, not unlike alcohol, cigarettes, or other harmful substances.
His 2013 book, Salt Sugar Fat, explored foodpanies'' aggressive marketing of those products and their impact on our health.
In his new book, Hooked, Moss updates the food giants'' efforts to keep us eating what they serve, and how they''re responding toplaints from consumers and health advocates.
Processed food is inexpensive, it''s legal, and it''s everywhere.
 panies'' advertising is cueing （提示）us to remember those products and we want those products constantly.
So the food environment is one of those key things that makes food even more problematic for so many people. Memory, nostalgia（念旧） in particular, plays a big role in the foods we crave.
Sodapanies discovered that if they put a soda in the hands of a child when they''re at a ball game with their parents, that soda will forever be associated with that joyous moment.
Later in life, when that child wants to experience a joyous moment, they''re going to think of soda. Many people seekfort in the snacks they remember from childhood.
Moss examines （研究）the waypanies capitalize（利用） on our memories, cravings and brain chemistry to keep us snacking. One of the reasons I came to think that some of these food products are even more powerful, more troublesome than drugs can be is memory.
What we eat is all about memory.
And we begin forming memories for food at a really early age. And we keep those memories for a lifetime.
Knowing this, the food industry spends lots of time trying to shape the memories that we have for their products.
One of the features of addiction that scientists studying drug addiction discovered back in the 1990s was that the faster a substance hits the brain, the more apt we are as a result to act impulsively(冲动的）. There''s nothing faster than food in its ability to hit the brain.
For Moss, this puts the notion of "fast food" in an entirely new light as this isn''t limited to fast food chains almost90% of food products in grocery stores are processed foods.
Everything in the industry is about speed, from manufacturing to packaging.
Overall, Moss outlines the industry''s dependence on making their products inexpensive, super delicious, and incredibly（非常的） convenient for consumers.
Now that more and more people care about what they put in their bodies and are wanting to eat healthier, thesepanies are finding it really difficult to meet that new demand because of their own addiction（沉迷于） to making these convenience foods.
1.In what way does Michael Moss think processed food isparable to alcohol and cigarettes?
A)They are all addictive.
B)They are all necessary evils.
C)They are all engineered to be enjoyed.
D) They are all in increasingly great demand.
2.What does the author say plays a key role in the foods we crave?
A)The food environment.
B) Aggressive marketing.
C) Convenience.
D) Memory.
3.What do foodpanies do to capitalize on consumers'' association with their food products?
A) They strive to influence how consumers remember their products.
B)They attempt to use consumers'' long-term memories to promote addiction.
C) They try to exploit（利用) consumers'' memories for their products as early as possible.
D) They endeavor to find what consumers remember about their products.
4.How does the food industry operate from manufacturing to packaging, according to Moss?
A)Placing the idea of fast food in an entirely new light.
B)Setting no limit to the number of fast food chains.
C)Focusing on how quickly the work is done.
D) Prioritizing（优先） the quality of their products.
5.Why arepanies finding it difficult to satisfy consumers'' demand for healthier food products?
A)They think speed of production outweighs consumers'' health.
B)They believe their industry would perish （消亡）without fast foods.
C) They have to strike a balance between taste and nutrition.
D) They are hooked on（沉迷于） manufacturing convenience foods.
Key: A-D-A-C-D
Phonics,（声学） which involves sounding out words syllable by syllable（音节）, is the best way to teach children to read.
But in many classrooms, this can be a dirty word.
So much so that some teachers have had to sneak （偷偷的做）phonics teaching materials into the classroom.
Most American children are taught to read in a way that study after study has found to be wrong. The consequences of this are striking.
Less than half of all American adults were proficient（精通） readers in 2017.
American fourth graders rank 15th on the Progress in International Literacy Study, an international exam.
America is stuck in a（陷入） debate about teaching children to read that has been going on for decades.
Some advocate teaching symbol-sound relationships (the sound k can be spelled as c, k, ck, or ch), known as phonics.
Others support an immersive（沉浸式） approach (using pictures of a cat to learn the word cat), known as "whole language". Most teachers today, almost three out of four according to a survey by the EdWeek Research Centre in 2019, use a mix called "balanced literacy."
Thisbination of methods is ineffective.
"You can''t sprinkle in a little phonics," says Tte Smith, executive director of elementary education and reading at Mississippi''s education department.
"It has to be systematic（系统） and explicitly（明确的） taught."
Mississippi, often behind in social policy, has set an example here.
In a state once notorious（声名狼藉的） for its low reading scores, the Mississippi state legislature （立法机关 ）passed new literacy standards in 2013.
Since then Mississippi has seen remarkable gains.
Its fourth graders have moved from 49th (out of 50 states) to 29th on the National Assessment of Educational Prog- ress, a nationwide exam.
In 2019 it was the only state to improve its scores.
For the first time since measurement began, Mississippi''s pupils（学生 ） are now average readers, a remarkable achievement in such a poor state.
Mississippi''s success is attributed to implementing reading methods supported by a body of research known as the science of reading.
In 1997 Congress requested the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development and the Department of Education to convene（召集） a National Reading Panel（小组） to end the "reading wars" and synthesize （合成）the evidence.
The panel found that phonics, along with explicit instruction in phonemic awareness, fluency andprehension, worked best.
Yet over two decades on, "balanced literacy" is still being taught in classrooms.
But advances in statistics（统计学） and brain imaging have disproved the whole-language method.
To the teacher who is a proficient reader, literacy seems like a natural process that requires educated guessing, rather than the deliberate（刻意） process emphasized by phonics.
Teachers can imagine that they learned to read through osmosis when they were children. Without proper training, they bring this to classrooms.
1.What do we learn about phonics in many American classrooms?
A)It is ill reputed.
B)It is mostly misapplied（误用的）.
C)It is arbitrarily（武断的） excluded.
D) It is misrepresented.（歪曲的）
2.What has America been witnessing for decades?
A) An obsession （痴迷）with innovating teaching methodologies of reading.
B)An enduring debate over the approach to teaching children to read.
C)An increasing concern with many children''s inadequacy in literacy.
D) An ever-forceful（一直） advocacy（拥护） of abined method for teaching reading.
3.Why does Tte Smith think abination of teaching methods is ineffective?
A) Elementary school children （小学生）will be frustrated when taught with several methodsbined.
B) Phonics has to be systematically applied and clearly taught to achieve the desired effect.
C) Sprinkling in a little phonics deters（打消） the progress of even adequately motivated children.
D) Balanced literacy fails to sustain children''s interest in developing a good reading habit.
4.What does the author say Mississippi''s success is attributed to?
A) Convening a National Reading Panel to synthesize（综合） research evidence.
B)Placing sufficient emphasis upon both fluency andprehension.
C) Adopting scientifically grounded approaches to teaching reading.
D)Obtaining support from Congress to upgrade teaching methods.
5.What have advances in statistics and brain imaging proved ineffective?
A)The teaching of symbol-sound relationships.
B) Explicit instruction in phonemic awareness.
C) Efforts to end the reading wars.
D)The immersive approach.
Key: A-B-B-C-D
Many oppose workplace surveillance（监督）, because of the inherent （固有的）dehumanizing （非人性的）effect it has and the relentless pressure it brings.
But it''s on the rise around the world as firms look to be more efficient by squeezing（压榨） more productivity from their workers.
More than half ofpanies with over $750m in annual revenue （税收）used "non-traditional" monitoring techniques on staff last year.
Monitoring employee performance gives firms （公司）the ability to assess how their staff are performing and interacting, which can be good for both the firm and employees themselves. A growing number of analyticspanies offer this service.
They gather "data exhaust（废气）" left by employees'' email and instant messaging apps, and use name badges equipped with radio-frequency identification devices and microphones.
These can check how much time you spend talking, your volume and tone of voice, even if you do not dominate conversations.
While this may sound intrusive, exponents（倡导者） argue that it can also protect employees against bullying and sexual harassment.（骚扰）
Some of this data analysis can produce unexpected results.
For example, it was found that people who sat at 12-person lunch tables tended to interact, share ideas more and outperform（胜过） those who regularly sat at four-person tables, a fact that would probably have gone undetected without such data analysis.
Over the last few years a Stockholm co-working space called Epicenter has gone much further and holds popular"chipping parties", where people can have microchips（微芯片） implanted in their hands.
They can use the implants to access electronically-controlled doors, or monitor how typing speed correlates with heart rate.
Implanted chips may seem extreme, but it is a relatively small step from ID cards and biometrics （生物统计学）to such devices.
As long as such schemes are voluntary, there will probably be a growing number of convenience-oriented uses so that a substantial （大量）number of workers would opt to have a chip inserted.（植入）
But if implanted chips are used to reduce slack（休息） time or rest breaks, that could prove to be detrimental.（有害的）
And if surveillance （监督）tools take away autonomy, that''s when they prove most unpopular.
A lot depends on how such monitoring initiatives （积极性）aremunicated and this could prevent possible revolts （叛乱）being staged.
If bosses don''tmunicate effectively, employees assume the worst.
But if they''re open about the information they''re collecting and what they''re doing with it, research suggests 46% of employees are generally okay with it.
Although many such monitoring schemes use anonymised（匿名的） data and participation（参与） is voluntary, many staffers remain sceptical （怀疑）and fear an erosion （侵蚀）of their civil liberties.（公民自由）
So workplace surveillance could be empowering for staff and useful forpanies looking to be more efficient and profitable.
But implemented in the wrong way, it could also be an unpopular tool of oppression（压抑） that proves counterproductive.（适得其反）
1.Why are many people opposed to monitoring employee performance?
A) It puts workers under constant pressure.
B)It is universally deemed anti-human by nature.
C)It does both mental and physical harm to employees monitored.
D) It enables firms to squeeze maximal productivity from employees.
2.What is the supporters'' argument for workplace surveillance（监督）?
A) It enables employees to refrain（避免） from dominating conversations.
B) It enhances employees'' identification with firms they work in.
C)It can alert （提醒）employees to intrusion （入侵）into their privacy.
D) It can protect employees against aggressive behavior.
3.What does the author want to show by the example of different numbers of people interacting at lunch tables?
A) Data analysis is key to the successful implementation（实施） of workplace surveillance.
B)Analyzing data gathered from workers can yield something unexpected.
C) More workmates sitting at a lunch table tend to facilitate interaction and idea sharing.
D) It is hard to decide on how many people to sit at a lunch table without data analysis.
4.What does much of the positive effect of monitoring initiatives depend on?
A) How frequently employees are to be monitored.
B)What specific personal information is being excluded.
C)What steps are taken to minimize their detrimental impact.
D) How well bosses make known（公开） their purpose of monitoring.
5.What concern do monitoring initiatives cause among many staffers?
A) They may empower employers excessively.
B)They may erode the workplace environment.
C) They may infringe（侵犯） upon staffers'' entitled freedom.
D) They may be counterproductive in the long run.
Chimpanzees, human beings'' closest animal relatives, share up to 98% of our genes. Yet humans and chimpanzees lead very different lives.
Fewer than 300,000 wild chimpanzees live in a few forested corners of Africa today, while humans have colonized（殖民） every corner of the globe.
At more than 7 billion, human population dwarfs that of nearly all other mammals - despite our physical weaknesses.
What could account for our species'' incredible evolutionary successes?
One obvious answer is our big brains.
It could be that our raw intelligence gave us an unprecedented ability to think outside the box, innovating solutions to thorny （痛苦的）problems as people migrated （迁徙）across the globe.
But a growing number of cognitive scientists and anthropologists are rejecting that explanation.
They think that, rather than making our living as innovators, we survive and thrive precisely because we don''t think for ourselves.
Instead, people cope with challenging climates and ecological contexts by carefully（生态） copying others.
In a famous study, psychologists Victoria Horner and Andrew Whiten showed two groups of test subjects - children and chimpanzees - a mechanical box with a treat（款待，食物） inside.
In one condition, the box was opaque（不透明的）, while in the other it was transparent.
The experimenters demonstrated how to open the box to retrieve the treat, but they also included the irrelevant（不相关的） step of tapping on the box with a stick.
Oddly, the children carefully copied all the steps to open the box, even when they could see that the stick had no practical effect.
That is, they copied irrationally（非理性的）: Instead of doing only what was necessary to get their reward, children slavishly （盲目的）imitated every action they''d witnessed.
Of course, that study only included three- and four-year-olds.
But additional research has shown that older children and adults are even more likely to mindlessly copy others'' actions, and infants （婴儿）are less likely to over-imitate -that is, to precisely copy even impractical actions. By contrast, chimpanzees in the study only over-imitated in the opaque condition.
In the transparent condition - where they saw that the stick was mechanically useless they ignored that step entirely.
Other research has since supported these findings.
When ites to copying, chimpanzees are more rational than human children or adults. Where does the seemingly irrational human preference for over-imitatione from?
Anthropologist（人类学家） Joseph Henrich points out that people around the world rely on technologies that are often soplex that no one can learn them rationally.
Instead, people must learn them step by step, trusting in the wisdom of more experienced elders and peers.
So the next time you hear someone arguing passionately that everyone should embrace nonconformity（墨守成规） and avoid imitating others, you might laugh a little bit. We''re not chimpanzees, after all.
1.What might explain humans'' having the largest population of almost all mammals?
A) They are equipped with raw strength for solving the most challenging problems.
B)They cope with the outside world more effectively than their animal relatives.
C) They possess the most outstanding ability to think.
D) They know how to survive everywhere on earth.
2.What accounts for humans'' evolutionary successes according to a growing number of cognitive scientists and anthropologists?
A) They are better at innovating solutions.
B)They thrive through creative strategies.
C)They are naturally adaptive to ecological contexts.
D) They meet challenges by imitating others carefully.
3.What does the author think is odd about the findings of the study by Victoria Horner and Andrew Whiten?
A) Children irrationally imitated every action of the experimenters.
B) Chimpanzees could tell the transparent box from the opaque one.
C) Chimpanzees could retrieve the treat more quickly than children did.
D) Children omitted （遗漏）the step of tapping on the box with a stick to open it.
4.What is anthropologist Joseph Henrich''s explanation for the human preference for copying?
A)It originates in the rationality of people around the world.
B) It stems （起源于）from the way people learnplex technologies.
C)It results from people distrusting their own wisdom.
D) It derives from the desire to acquire knowledge step by step.
5.What point does the author want to emphasize when he says "We''re not chimpanzees"?
A)It is arguable whether everyone should avoid imitation.
B)It is characteristic of human beings to copy others.
C)It is desirable to trust in more knowledgeable peers.
D) It is naive to laugh at someone embracing nonconformity.
Key: C-D-A-B-B